Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-16-2012 ac murry ss2council memoianOu m October 10, 201 2 City Counci l Katie Lichtig, City Manage r Derek Johnson, Community Development Directo r BY : Kim Murry, Deputy Director of Community Development 9CE.M SUBJECT : Council Correspondence for the study session regarding the LUCE Update o n October 16, 201 2 Attached please find a summary of public input received at the Community Workshop held o n September 27, 2012 that was not available at the time the staff report went to print . DATE : TO : VIA : FROM : AGEND A CORRESPONDENC E Date I 0IIca/I 24tem#SS a Council Memo Template LAND USE 8 CIRCULATIO N U P D A T E Public Workshop #2,Community Inpu t September 27, 201 2 The City of San Luis Obispo and the Tas k Force for the Land Use and Circulatio n Element (TF-LUCE) hosted the second in a series of community workshop on th e development of the Land Use and Circulatio n Elements Update . The workshop was held a t the Ludwick Center Gym, starting at 6 PM . About 40 community members and a majorit y of the TF-LUCE members were present at th e workshop, supported by City staff an d members of the consulting team . The objective of the workshop was t o collect/refine community input on issues an d opportunities associated with six key topi c areas . This information will be used to guid e development of alternatives in later phases . The six topics were developed based on th e community survey, neighborhood workshop s and TF-LUCE inputs . The six topic areas were : 1 .Creative Reuse of Lan d Downtown Motorized Circulatio n Non-Motorized Circulatio n New Growth Area s 6 . Community Amenities The gym was set up with six seating areas , one for each of the topic . A seventh area wa s also set up to allow the public to provid e other thoughts they have concerning th e General Plan Update . Each seating areas had a large poster tha t corresponded to the topic being discussed . These posters contained key facts , community survey information and map s concerning the topic area . Each poster also included two or three "Focus Questions". These questions were designed to help ge t the conversation started, but participant s were encouraged to express any thought s they had concerning the topic . Workshop participants were free to sit at an y of the areas, but were asked to rotate t o another group after 20 minutes . Each topic area was staffed by two or mor e TF-LUCE members and a City staff member . Their roles were to facilitate discussion, wit h the focus on listening to what the communit y wanted to express . At each topic area, a TF- LUCE member wrote down all publi c comments received during the evening . The following pages contain a verbatim listin g of the comments provided . For each topic . area, a copy of the poster is shown, followe d by the comments received . "Page" notation s refer to a page of poster paper containing th e person's comment . For instance, Page i-i refers to the first page of notes associate d with Poster 1 .Where the editors' of thes e notes provided a comment or note, these ar e shown in brackets with the letters "ed ." Group discussion on Community Amenitie s2. 3 • 4 • 5 • Workshop 2 Public Input 2012 10 09b RRR .docx Page 1 city o Itan Luis onispo Poster t Creative Reuse of Lan d 7 6a ofrescondentisuppwted using vacant la%i o V existing rt$gttborhoods far r&dentia budkg s eke those which hen been buit in the neIhborhaod . 6 % supported redeveloping underdeveloped sites with bsntrkng s mmpatibie with the neighborhood . A Wino% than half supported flitted use %MI development In existing b WWrg c 800 of respondema chow development in edspn g commemul areas, uung vacant lots for ne w bugd'%os gemngy Ake ones which Faye been built them . 41 % chose repladng 'month commercial buddegs with large ones , and 27% dross commemialjreFideMiffi macs use . respfr; Focus Question s a)What are the possible locations for infill (business or residential)? b)Survey responses indicate that residents want new development to be consistent with existing development — what does that look like? Page 2 city oI'.a=Sdn Luis OBISpO ■No multi-family development in R-i and R-z ■Yes! Redevelop University Square . Potential opportunity! -- i .e, change the commercial options to better cater to college students ■OK to have residential over commercial in commercial zone s ■Be sensitive to what is in immediate area of proposed developmen t ■"Compatibility" with adjacent neighborhood needs to be better define d ■There were no Design Guidelines for mixed use, specifically C-N ■Look at height and mass of surrounding buildings, including C-N buildings, in residential neighborhood s ■Look at parking availability - be sensitive t o ■Granny units need to provide parkin g ■No new housing developments next to areas already impacted by traffi c ■Re : Johnson Ave multi-family development should become R-i because of traffic impact for French Hospital, the high school and the ne w Orcutt developmen t ■In mixed use, there should not be more residential than commercia l ■Lot split is OK if the result matches what's already ther e ■Do not put student developments in the cit y ■Consistent / existence development means in : height, mass, density (parking must be included), design Page 3 city or„§tam tuts osisp o ■No one wants higher density housing next to them in lesser density zones (i .e ., R-3 next to R-t, etc .) ■New development built with/quality material s ■Look at commercially zoned parcels compatible wit/residential development instead of commercia l ■Roundhouse area good for redevelopmen t ■Mixed use on Taft next to single-story homes is, according to current residents,not compatible because of heigh t ■Extend from Ranch north toward Staples – save prime ag lan d ■When re-using older industrial buildings for new uses ... increase the design environmental standard to a higher leve l ■New development should blend in with context-massin g ■Mixed –use and accessory dwellings to be built in urban core and commercial zone s ■Redevelop University Square on Foothill to look like Poly Canyon Village, including the pool (and allow SLO residents to use ) [commenter now lives in Morro Bay ] ■Redevelop General Hospital property [commenter now lives in Morro Bay ] ■Lot next to Social Services—Johnson Ave [commenter now lives in Morro Bay ] ■Maintain neighborhood services ... replace like with like, i .e ., Scolari's should become a new marke t ■Residential over commercial – even Big Bo x ■Creamery ■Foothill Shopping Plaza – mixed us e ■Housing w/amenities for familie s ■Old Emerson School site -- keep some parklan d ■Performance standards -4 Basketball Court on Top 4 for parking next to transit routes, location dependen t ■Living in urban core : limited or no parking; pay for parking (garage, whatever) Page 4 URN city of..::_r"Sao LUIS o61spO ■Shared vehicle s ■Amenities/neighborhood services in walking distance - Downtown Cor e ■Like Broad St mixed use on Sacrament o ■Parking reqs - generational - may not need so much in futur e ■Re-use houses as housing (that are now businesses ) ■Look at nighttime noise downtow n ■Develop w/an eye to minimizing noise, e .g ., apartments in back of building s ■Infill on Monterey between Santa Rosa and Grand and high-density, mixed use : commercial/office and residential (on Monterey ) more mixed use in industrial park s ■New housing need to be either near transit or downtow n ■SLO City Farm -good idea - urban ag - same with/Dalidi o ■Housing close to where people work ■Reward people for building where there's already infrastructure and penalize those who build where new infrastructure is neede d ■Take into consideration impact of new development - traffic infrastructur e ■Build in a way that has the least impact on the tow n ■University Square - keep pharmac y ■Keep infill consistent with/what is already ther e ■Residential above commercia l ■Tract housing should look more divers e ■Like historic districts - architectural design ■Use roof tops for dining, open space - make use of space - public too with/benche s ■Rent roof tops for downtown residents to park ■Caltrans Corp yard, garbage company - good reuse areas Page 5 city o f SAP Ittis OsiSpo ■ Mid-Higuera developmen t ■Redevelop University Square with/commercial (bottom floor) and residential (2d floor) with/underground parking (not mechanical) of 1-2 level s ■Infill by Sunset Drive-In for homeless, including housing and public services [job re-training, social services, etc ., are already there ] ■Infill should be compatible/consistent with/neighborhood character in bulk and scale and heigh t ■If Dalidio is annexed and developed, make the 5o% development adjacent to existing commercial development in order to preserve vist a and plantable AG land ; this will also allow for ingress/egress to Laguna Lake Park and open space via pedestrian/bike pat h Open space ag Development Embassy Suit e ■However, prefer Dalidio NOT be development or annexe d ■A couple more Wineman Hotels – upper Monterey, University Squar e ■High Density @ University Square ■Co-housing cooperative housing – bungalow courts in all existing neighborhood s ■Manufactured homes Page 6 !7 city ok ...::::Y :m Ban LUIS oslspo Poster 2 Downtown you £U t30W6(OWI' C90 Car to,iowntow i rr Quick Facts : The caty owns and maintains 3,093 parkin g spaces in the committal core : 23% in surface lots,389E in parking structures an d 37%street paricing Survey Says: wpa.y{b.wg~g~of respondents ranked the Downtown ai'7 0 area at a pacethey parecSath enjoy .. This wasfollovedby pat hate and the Minio n tnthe rattgsin thelDS8 hooey. but, the Downtown was also ranked asa part of town least enjoyed by 131%. of respondents . When asked abort land use thaws sought, 59% of those responding shied fewer bars and nightclubs et the Downtown . IA CONCtPTUALP11 y Focus Question s a)What attracts you to Downtown San Luis Obispo (or to downtowns in other places)? b)Are there things you would change about the Downtown (could include circulation/land use)? Page 7 city o fsmLuis onis}10 ■Businesses - retail - Ross, Jewelry, Ga p ■People = saf e ■Court Street = sense of place = pedestrian plac e ■Historic architectural + "stuff " ■All the shops and restaurant s ■Layout - simple layout - one-way streets - main arterie s ■Expand sidewalk s ■Lower Higuera - needs to change . Cars speed up . ■Need a decent movie theater with/good sight lines and stadium seatin g ■Walkable but too much traffic on Higuera Become an arteria l ■Too many alcohol outlets - 57 (2009) restaurants + stares + bar s ■Need "unique shops" and new kind of niche tourism (a la wine industry ) ■50+ don't have an interest in D .T . D .T . dying for them ■Less of a drinking scen e ■Maintain sidewalk - was h ■Anchor store like Macy's, Nordstrom in Sports Authority spac e ■Like small business mi x ■Create a "zone" of unique "creative" store s ■No parking on Higuera between Santa Rosa -* Nipomo Page 8 ■Pedestrian dining encroaches on pedestrian spac e Sidewalks get too narro w ■Worry about finding HANDICAP parking close to government building s ■Different expectations downtow n "Mix things up" (events/activities ) Interactive activitie s ■Pedestrian-only streets (temporary ) ■Art After Dark type events more often ■Very walkabl e ■Street trees, shade, attractive narrower street s ■Non-chain store s ■Outdoor eatin g ■Good people watching ■Active/filled store front s ■Vacant stores/site s ■Creek greenery/wate r ■Older, preserved historic building s ■Lower buildings/modest scal e ■No tall/"blank" buildings (blocks ) ■Blinking crosswalks (importance of people ) ■Events (good variety ) ■No smokin g ■Public art ■More bike parking/less car street parking city o fIlls OBIS O Page 9 ■Not bike-friendly enough ■More open spaces, roof-top? Street leve l ■Roof-top dinin g ■Close Santa Rosa between Higuera/Mars h Create transit cente r ■Return home conversions (office) to home s Back zone to "R" "R/O"? ■Less street parking in city core ■Smoking ordinance -- "too much"!! ■Citywide Wi-F i ■[ed . word not legible on poster] air pollution ! ■Extend bike boulevards/etc . to outer area s 2 arterials to cross town (bikes ) ■Cleaner downtow n ■More on-street bike parkin g ■Too many "camping out" downtow n Homeless issu e ■Mixed use = more residential downtow n ■Wineman units no kitchenettes Page 10 �Need to deal with/generational gap in wishe s Rooftop dining <+ �Turn business in residential homes back to single famil y �People Place * Traffic speed low Constant stimulation "not boring " Visuall y Activity Layout of Lan d Weather — micro-climat e Like citrus-friendl y Local stores — boutiques store s Tree s Art Neighborly — "change encounters " Business "bustle " Sidewalk seatin g Not cookie cutte r 7: t �00_0_d architectural design — all style s �Old historic buildings details (Andrews Building ) �Encourage diverse but toad design s Modern+ historic ■Granada building big + ■No angle parkin g ■Social sidewalks ■Music — Creekside SLO Bre w ■Coffee option s ■Farmers' market — expand ? ■#'s More "parklets " C Lose lane of parking on Higuer a Create public space s Balance adverse impacts on traffic ■ Health stores, convenience grocery ■ Underutilized parking structure s Better way finding to structures +Walkabilit y +Adequate parkin g +Visibly clea n +Retail diversity and pricing is good/competitiv e +Event s +Plazas, tress, green spaces, parks, cree k +Restaurants and bars 'city oftins onisp o Page 12 Improved transit cente r Bike/pedestrian friendl y Narrower/fewer auto lanes to enhance pedestrian/bik e ■ Need data on through traffic downtow n + Downtow n Character = small town downtow n No good bread in SLO Page 13 ~pctty o fc: z,a;,,,t sera Lws onlspo Poster 3 Motorized Circulation ores : ou like / not b)What changes would you make to the circulation system ? .).What would entice . odtblic transit ? When Mkedto name the least liked planks of enjoyment In th e City,six of the top nine were specific roadways o r streets in general . • Los O,os Valley Road • Madonna Roa d •Foothill Boulevard • Streets (in general ) • Broad Street • SouthHiguera Street 'Y201 /.ronsll RkIership Riders pe 38.993 22 % 6 t,309 Community Workshop #2 ember 27, 2012 Focus Question s a)What streets do you like / not like and why? b)What changes would you make to the circulation system ? c)What would entice you to use public transit? Page 14 City L U OF '~ 510 IS 01151)O Like: ■Mill St. (trees/pretty/"like a boulevard") ■A lot of residential street s ■"Speed boards" — want more — they wor k D9n't : 1)Johnson between RR underpass and Laurel — should be all z lane s z) No good east-west arterials so high traffic on "cross-town" streets like Tank Farm/Sout h Buchon, etc . Get traffic off residential, e .g ., Pismo between Johnson and Tor o 3) High speeds between Marsh and Broad on Osos/Santa Barbara and South Higuera/also LOV R cycling difficult on these streets Want : ■Connect Bishop to Johnson O ■Prado connect to Madonna (under/overpass ) ■Buses memory [S.i .e., hard to remember timing between buses] headways — 4o minutes not natural and don't connect wel l ■More frequent "inconvenient"/shorter wait time s ■Arrival prediction/tech goo d ■One-way loops not so good — make loops go in both directions Page 15 Mira city o r,' -&an LWs osispo ■Want more and different traffic-calming measure s ■Like downtown wide sidewalk s ■Like raised crosswalks — slows car s ■"Love the bus" but it "just doesn't work time-wise, not often enough " ■Concerned about circulation impacts to "Johnson Ave Housing" development proposed (school district policy). Shouldn't be students-hig h density, too many people dumping onto Johnson from Lizzie plus Johnson already impacted from hospital, churches, high school, Cal Pol y students ■South St better with/2 lanes rather than 4 ■Focus on students (Cal Poly) not enough on residenc e ■Calif/Johnson/San Luis Drive very bad especially during high school am/pm traffic Like: ■Wants Prado from Madonna all way to Broa d ■Love public transit especially for C .P . students wants connector (route) from TJs to Target/Madonna Plaza without going downtown (LOVR ) are a ■Mill St — tree s ■Morro St "Bike Blvd" area — cars and bikes good/closed-off part, all good, especially from Marsh parking structur e ■Bulb-outs on Higuera downtow n ■Sacto between Orcutt and Industrial (need4way stop Capitolio ) drunks etc . Page 16 Don't Like : ■LOVR — hard as pedestrian — can 't walk Target to Costco . Long wait time to cross ■Anyplace where speed >45 mph, e .g ., Broad (downtown to airport ) in reality / better enforcement or traffic calmin g ■Plant trees on Broad from South -* Buckley ; South —trees??? Where are the y feels like freewa y HATE : ■Faux bulb outs on Osos and Pacific!!! Walk across still, do not use bulbou t Problem : Broad and Upham crosswalk— no one slows dow n • Need traffic calming Hawthorne School q Problem corner intersection : Broad/South/Santa Barbara-* by Fire Station i OO Better signage would hel p reduction in lanes helpe d Oa On Higuera between South and Madonna — 40o feet of congestio n ■Buses 4A and 4B like backup buse s ■Move destinations past Marigold Center south on Broa d ■What happened to employee "downtown access"??? Reinstate or better publiciz e ■Don't use bus — take kids to school — have to driv e ■Buses need to come more often — riding bicycle is faste r ■Love the roundabout at train station! More roundabouts (@ Broad and South!) •Ilg city or_..,sari Luis oBispo Page 17 ■111p city ofj.san lids onispo Dislike: LOV R Bridge over freewa y More desti [ed . other "desinations"?] ■Prado throughway desperately needed, i .e .,east-west cross-town connection s ■"Sharing arrows" on roads are good to let drivers know bikes are legi t ■Have been yelled at while cycling on sharrow s ■Chorro and Murray — dangerous bulb out — z cyclists have broken bonesV"can't see it " ■Lots of traffic calming are goo d 4 way stops slows things down, e .g ., SF [ed. "San Francisco"?] put them everywher e ■Wider streets = more traffic, i .e ., like bigger pants for obesit y Like : ■Oceannaire between Madonna and LOV R ■Downtown streets — Higuera, Monterey, Marsh, Chorr o ■Like one-way s ■Chorro from Foothill to downtown [ed . word not readable on notes] stop signs and reminds you it's a residential are a ■Only commission statisticallyMnificant surveys — bad survey design, survey questions are not well-worded, too fluffy Page 18 city ofIws Onispo Don't Like : ■Bishop St needs to go through to Broa d ■Lizzie St going up to old school/Wood/and developmen t Already congeste d ■Oceannaire between Madonna and Garcia (Target side ) •Needs some stop signs on it like other sid e •Need another 25 mph sig n ■Bike Blvd is very confusing and UGLY (as older driver ) (too many signs) ■Need more signage on residential streets like stop, slow down, kids paying, etc . (i.e., safety signs ) ■Hard to take transit ■Taxpayers would pay a (e .g ., $5o) surcharge on taxes (if sunsetted after —10 years) to pay for Prado Road improvements to happen soone r rather than later (i .e., need east-west connection ) ■Every corner adjacent to an elementary schools should have a stop sign and crosswal k ■Want another Target east of Santa Rosa where the bus terminal was planne d (Prof Jud suggested ) ■ Dislike LOV R ant Marsh to be two-way again (between Johnson and a ■Pismo St should be two wa y Make Pacific i way (west bound) Page 19 W w cityof,Ar t ;a s.\n Luis osis1to ■Like LOVR but want widened, ideally Class t bike lanes . Make a deal with/landowners re : property tax to expand wherever ne w development occurs - would help families and senior s ■Like the idea of making a few more of our streets near downtown one-way to enable the other half of the street to be bike lane . For example, Pacific . Make bi-directional uni-directional . ■Do not take public transit . Have special needs child . Need to drive for emergency . ■Like : Santa Rosa speed and traffic signal timing fin e ■More frequent stops for buses during commute times 7AM-9AM, 4PM-6P M ■Want buses to run every 15 minute s ■Bishop's Peak 4 school commute . Would walk/cycle but it is too dangerous . ■More frequent scheduling would help familie s ■Want comprehensive EIR on Prado Rd, especially Broad to Madonna . It is piecemeal now . Illegally segmented under CEQA. ■Dislike : LOVR (live one block away ) •Not planned wel l •Too impacted for neighborhoods around . It is not good ■Like : cul-de-sac Cucaracha C t ■Oceannaire impacted by people trying to avoid LOV R ■Higuera too impacted . Should have no parking Santa Rosa to Nipomo . Can't see stores . Homeless/peds are obscured 4 dangerou s ■Dislike : Santa Rosa downtown to Foothill (2 ) ■Like : Chorro downtown to Foothill Page 20 city o f san Luis onisp o ■Dislike : Foothill Blvd . Have been rear-ended her e ■Like Chorro (Palm at Higuera). It is hard to have bikes here ■Streets are not bike-friendl y ■Want more ped-friendly streets downtow n ■Close down Higuera for pe d ■Madonna (from South to Madonna) -- dislike (Higuera to LOVR ) ■Broad (Marsh/Monterey) - like, many stores, variety, restaurants, historic building s ■Need an overpass at Prado (2 ) ■Need new bike path providing a connection between Madonna Road and Foothill Blvd . (past Laguna Lake and Cerro San Luis)- i .e,. no car s ■How to contain traffic on Foothill? From LOVR into town 45 mph too fas t ■South Higuera and South and Madonna is a mess ■S . Higuera and LOVR is a mess to o ■Traffic lights annoying downtown - not timed well . You pass one green only to hit a red at next intersection . SF [ed ."San Francisco"?] i s timed better . Same on Madonna R d ■Public transi t •More frequen t •On tim e •Vagrants on buses and shelters make seniors feel unsaf e •89 years old - another doesn't take transit - buses smelly, feel unsafe, dangerous Page 21 ■Buses a problem for bikes – need to make buses smaller or bike lanes bigger or separate the tw o ■Biking my main form of transportatio n ■Have never taken bus in SLO, but have when I lived in other citie s ■Better enforcement of speed limits on LOVR, all streets – no one is heeding the speed feedback sign s ■The two lanes going into Target Only one goes to Target where everyon e wants to go, so right hand one backs up [S .see Diagram 1 ] ■Like : Laguna Lake parking lot – changes to get in have improved congestio n ■Foothill needs better pedestrian access from Ferrini over to Foothill Plaz a ■Rite-Aid/Albertsons getting out onto Foothill (left hand turns are killer from stores ) ■Intersection Chorro/Foothill/Broad a mes s ■Love low-traffic, low-speed streets whether on bike or in car . The major arterials/collectors are just "anti-SLO " Avoid at all times : ■LOVR from Madonna to to 1 ■People take Chorro from South/Broad into downtown – (not Broad or OsoslSanta Barbara)—Chorro much nicer driv e ■Like Foothill from Patricia and Tassajara but NOT from Tassajara to California because 2 lanes with/enter turn lane (like) but 4 lanes on othe r (dislike) ■Like Mill St. Trees make it feel good, people slow dow n ■Plan for growth – buy land rights now to make it Hwy lot -1 connection possible !7 scan o fstWs onispo Page 22 city o rsanlws onisp o ■Circular suggestion : A "fast lane" way to get from Santa Rosa/Highland to Broad, i .e ., thru downtown heart a way with/out dealing with/al l tourist/downtown traffi c ■Downtown Access Pass needs much better promotion, and access broadened/expanded to anyone who 1iv downtown too (i .e ., peopl e who live where meters are or in new condos downtown ) ■7th graders and up should learn how to use bus – "bus classes" to learn how to do it and remove stigma for locals (i .e ., not just Cal Poly an d homeless people use it!) ■Should NOT have more stop sign s ■Neighborhood traffic circles not stop signs – keep residential traffic vin at – 5 mp h ■Bike Blvd changed to circles not blockade s ■More bike boulevards with/circles not blockades – local traffic should be able to go on local streets but local streets should not be cut-thru s for non-local traffic Page 23 CUM city of SAO Luis otUSpO Poster 4 Non-Motorized Circulatio n SU 55%s o a f i d re co spo m m nt s ng by individual drivers shoul d be discouraged and use o f busses, van pools, bicycles, and carpools encouraged . 5 f~of respondents d to of bicycle infrastructure (bike lanes, paths and parking ) 4,40/of respondents supported more sidewalk improvements an d pedestrian connection s QUick Facts; tpproalmarNp43 WWI of -: in Sm Wit Ubkpe am made rteproveinep t etwurk!:are"nee l •..mW~~~—F•r ..aweuw sa.+0,.1 M F .,Y.Ynd ru u!Mk.I NnJinrrtr.IXnwwnyn„n.#a4rMU wa4r,tyyrntl 1..e Pedestrian Choices Community Workshop #2 September 27, 201 2 t! n7 iCYiptaYet»e r Focus Question s a)What improvements to our pedestrian network are needed ? b)What improvements to our bicycle network are needed? Page 24 city of san leis onispo Safety, Connectivity, Finish Plans, Leadership (No Reaction ) ■Finish Class 1 bike paths (railroad safety, Bob Jones) NOW ! •Put City money into this infrastructur e ■More bike boulevard s ■Difficult to cross Broa d •Create a pedestrian islan d •Time to cross is too short (Orcutt and Broad, South and Broad ) ■Difficult to cross South St •Bicycle/pedestrian priority stoplights and crossin g ■No safe bike route to Hawthorne Schoo l ■Upham and Broad - cars do not stop for people who need to cros s ■Not adequate crossings between Orcutt and South on Broa d ■If it is pedestrian friendly, it is friendly for bicyclist s ■Put trees in the middle of South S t ■Osos and Santa Barbara - very difficult to cross, busy intersectio n •Bike path is gone - people going north don't want to take Morro (Bike Boulevard ) ■Leadership from the City implementing bike pla n ■San Luis Dr and Johnson and California - traffic jam create congestion that bicyclists cannot get throug h ■Safe access to schools - bikes and walkin g ■Leadership/City Council to take a bike and walking tour of SL O ■Pursue new creative solutions as outlined in the NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guid e ■Consider finishing low cost solutions from bicycle plan Page 25 ■Build out bike pla n ■Johnson, Lizzie and San Luis Drive - Johnson Housing Project and concerned about traffi c • Suggestion : Overpass for pedestrians, allows traffic to move continuousl y • Do not add more residential units to the are a ■Bike paths on Orcutt - can't see bicyclists as you travel over hills, cyclists cannot see cars easil y ■Broad 3 too fast, drop the speed limit ■Adopt the NACTO guideline s ■Underpass on Chorro feels very unsafe at dark, lots of vegetation, fencing, no eyes on the street, narro w More lighting may help, as well as moving the fences back (setback) and clear back vegetation so you can see the cree k ■Make Higuera through downtown 2 lanes for cars and the 3rd lane for bicyclist s ■Dangerous bulb out at Chorro and Murry - when riding along Chorro toward downtown , bulb out is hard to see [ed. see Diagram 2 ] ■Maintenance of sidewalks downtown-sidewalks are uneven, posing tripping hazard s ■USE NEW SIGNS WHERE ALL SHARROWS ARE STRIPED [ed . see Diagram 3 ] ■Dana St and other street near California and Johnson - road is in disrepai r ■Bicyclist follow road rules (stop at red lights and stop signs ) ■Bicyclists ride on sidewalks, conflict with pedestrian s ■Class .' bike paths and enhanced lighting on the bike path s ■Better signage for all citizen s ■Increased local ordinances for pedestrians, bikers, skaters, to wear reflective gea r ■If need Class 1 bike paths are not possible on some city streets, consider road alterations to make one or two more streets one way to wiae n existing lane s ■Along LOVR, Class i lanes by giving a credit via property taxes fees to expand on their property city ofsvi tuts osispo Diagram 2 Diagram 3 Page 26 Uri city o f : salt IS onisp o ■Dl a com prehensive f_f Pra Road from Broad to Madonna or at least to Highway loi .The results will possibly © merit that th e Northern Alignment of Prado Road near the Damon-Garcia Sports Fields will be be turned into a Class i bike path to serve existing home s and the planned residences and commercial development in the Margarita Specific Plan, the Airport Area Specific Plan and Orcut t ■Foot bridge over Laguna Lake to the elementary schoo l ■Eliminate parking on Higuera and make bike lane s ■More bike connectivit y ■Traffic calming to even car traffic speeds and bicycle spee d ■Fix Marsh/Higuera intersection to accommodate bike and pedestrian crossing especially from bike pat h ■Signals at Marsh and Santa Rosa St, diag . crosswalk s ■All stores should have bike racks ■Commercial (bike) along bicycle safety corridor Page 27 cow ofnn luis otuspo Poster 5 New Growth Areas a) Whore are future growt h .:conortunitiesf gr housing ? Quick Fact A'rsplierc of it ruarrca" Is a plan for the .probable ultimate physicalbourulanes and ser ice area of a local governmenta l agency, as determined bythe local Agency ..:is Format on:Commission (Inca). ThetudSCseSt (ir cul onE cent s Study A€ea e ncompassesthe qty 's sphere of Influence and planscurrently in ate future g r unities for b i y Ag ~s respondervS support °No Change s I n N the Chys 1% growth rate, wkh over t4 % supporting some increase but not higher than the County ar th e State as a whole. lust 10%supported rw growth limds. TO accommodate ne w housing in the Ciiy,i support: Co unity Workshop a2 eptember 27, 201 2 Focus Questions a)Where are future growth opportunities for housing ? b)Where are future growth opportunities for businesses? Page 28 GM'S city o f....&m Luis onusp o ■Airport area - for mixed use - already manufacturing ■Concern for pedestrian/non-vehicle pathways as development occurs on the edge of tow n ■Mixed use doesn't work everywhere - need to be away from noise for residential/parking for residential/busines s ■Mixed use on top of Costco/Home Depot (residential above ) ■Target housing along major roads - facilitates movement/preserves, protects open spac e ■Commercial hubs -- at intervals - along major roads downtown major center/other small hub s ■Hiking/riding trails acros s ■For new growth areas/implement/install infrastructure (roads)first ■No businesses in Ri area s ■Need comprehensive EIR on Prado Road from Broad to Madonna (ioi ) ■Avila Ranch is good for residential provided there is a safe route to school (bike/pedestrian path ) ■Paths/bike/foot - that connect things - schools to residents/to shopping between city and county park s ■Chevron needs to clean up the spill, over twice the amount spilled through BP, before development takes place in Margarit a ■Staggered permit fees - depending on existing infrastructure ■Class i bike paths please - away from traffi c ■Area E (Avila Ranch) sounds like good opportunity for housin g ■"Proactive Planning", i .e ., Devaul Property/Sunny Acre s ■Develop in a way that protects beautiful species and farmlan d ■No one wants to live near airport ■What does next generation want to live in? (Density vs . SFR lots ) ■New growth should be balance of private/public open space Page 29 ■ Too bad Orcutt got approve d ■High density attracts students/not familie s ■Build infrastructure first ! ■New mobilehome parks = lower cost/higher densit y ■Senior housing? Where ? ■No additional traffic congestion, but we need more houses close to employment within the cit y ■City should invest more in bike infrastructure instead of relying solely on developer s ■Student renters encroaching on single housing unit s ■Explore bonds for important roads and bike transportation pla n ■Explore MPO regional sales tax with SLOCOG, or specific infrastructure assessment district city o~sail Iws onisp o Page 30 !g city of:;1r;san Luis oslspo Poster 6 Community Amenities VfT da ytl dviL f There are c 17 Community parka,. 8mini park* 6}otnt u I recreadan can hasadopsedww n p Peak (Roto r s Natural Reserve,l ewer Springs Natural ys : After Pown{own, City parks are the most "enjoyed" parts o f the City. 0 olrespondents said they want increase dtkneighborhood markets or fresh produc e markets in residential areas , nts said they wanted to increas e of small city parks in residential of respondentseald they wanted mor etospecialty stores (such as books or clothing) i n small neighborhood shopping centers. Parks & Walking D c /Pe'r?nr'P Focus Question s a)Where do you envision future natural open space? b)Where do you envision future parks and active recreation areas ? c)What neighborhood / community amenities are important to you? Page 31 ■amenity that could be moved : farmers' marke t ■Like differentiation between active rec parks and natural open space ■Would like even more connection of bike trail s ■Need market in Johnson/area (Scolari's left ) ■Interest in mobile food sources - market, farmer 3 resident (pop up farmers market ) mobile m ■"Parklets" (as in San Francisco) separated from traffic - permitte d ■Bike boulevards as linear parks ■Public space needed for folks not buying meals, etc . (in the downtown ) ■Wants more connectivity for walking between natural open space s ■MAP SHOULD SHOW DESIRED EXTENT OF O .S . "JOHNNY APPLESEED" TRAI L PUBLIC ART IS IMPORTAN T ■Market @ Scolaris site = importan t ■Little neighborhood parks or just put picnic table or vegetable plot s ■Bike connections between SLO/MB/Avila/PB - make them comfortable to us e ■Open air concert venue (Foothill area ) ■Irish Hills 4 Johnson Ranch connectio n ■Saddle between Cerro San Luis and Madonna Inn - outdoor venue in open space to look at horizon and sunset ■Terrace Hill - open sp? park? Important ■Keep hilltops in natural condition - preserve Page 32 city ofsanLUIS onlspo ■City has done ++ job in natural O .S . and art and parks ■Underground walk — creek s ■Make more opportunities to see creek (open buildings ) ■PUD's on S . Higuera — isolated from parks (lacks ) ■Perimeter path around city — connectivit y ■Monorail tram — Cal Pol y ■Creating paths along creek syste m ■Bob Jones bike trail - Finish it ■RR safety bike trail — finish i t ■Bike and pedestrian trails = important connection s ■Linear parks — multi-functional path — achieve z goals : recreation and circulatio n ■Creeks as linear parks — pedestrian and bike path s ■Connectivit y ■Damon Garcia — no safe way to get there by bike or pe d ■Schools — safe route s ■More senior services — more activitie s ■Grocery stores and parks within walking distance to new development neighborhood s ■Mix of use s ■Little pocket parks and flat surfaces in existing parks for seniors and handicappe d ■Rancho do Tolosa Park Islay/Arbors area — paths ++ ■Continue to develop O .S. ■Irish Hills - Johnson Ranch connectio n ■O .S . parking in neighborhoods Page 33 ■Iln city o faga+„a_t~,s Sall LUIS onispo ■Neighborhood parking permits to control parking/ make it easier for neighborhood parking permit — smaller distric t ■Area behind SESLOC — no parkin g ■Mitchell Park improvements = good . Safe (visibility), better infrastructure and interesting amenitie s ■Less smoke shops near neighborhood s ■Love public art and farmers' marke t ■Performances at Mission, Festival Mozaic — bring free concerts downtow n ■French Park — jewel but many don't know it's ther e ■Keeping O .S . natura l ■Conflicts between ag and residentia l ■City can influence county actions on border s ■Interim uses in exchange for O .S. ■Expand borders to Foothill but delay infrastructure — tool for O S ■S01 [ed.Sphere of Influence] could be expanded past Foothil l ■Keep natural open space protecte d ■Action on bike plan is needed (RR safety trail, Bob Jones Trail) projects are stuc k ■Oceannaire to Laguna — bike path blocke d ■Open space = important to retaining intellectual capital access and natural beaut y ■Wildlife corridors along creeks = important to project . Public access to creeks could help keep creeks clean and protected . ■Opportunities to close streets more often for different use s ■Art in streets (i .e ., i Madonnari in streets) ■Murals in public places Page 34 city o fwin tuts oRispo ■Skate park and mountain bike skills park in more urban area (corp yard behind Cal Trans lot ) ■Stenner Creek mountain biking skills area is not accessible to familie s ■Continuum of activities for all age s ■Connections that are comfortable for pedestrians/bike s ■Neighborhood market s *Top of parking structures 3 good location for public space . Great views . Potted plants, park cafe . ■"Rodent trails" — bike trails across creek etc . Develop as interpretive area of trai l ■Trail safety = visibility is importan t ■Community gardens are desirabl e ■Balance between urban vitality and quiet open space s ■Cal Poly = important amenit y ■Back of creek behind Children's Museum/Creek walk Page 35 qI,city o rs,ttha..m:can luis onispo Group 7 Other Topics Group 7 did not have a poster with a topic area to discuss . Group 7 was an area where participants could ask questions and provide any commen t they felt should be considered during the General Plan Update . ■High School and Adult School : Johnson Ave Housing Projec t 74 z bedroom unit s io i bedroom unit s 196 parking spaces ■Egress and ingress is on Lizzie and Fixilini (exit from Adult School ) Concerns : ■Traffic congestion on Lizzie and Johnson for police, fire, EMTs, ambulance, trash pickup, residents, commuters, students, school buses , hazardous student crossing, hospital traffic,RFFUCEDCIRCULATION,public access + parking for existing greenbelt trails and recreatio n [Lives now in Edna Valley . Wants to build in this area . Now owns property there .] We have good planning, so now we are focused on fine-tuning and that's a good thing . Parking Lots : ■z-wheeled motor scooters, need more to reduce use of cares, etc . • Put them everywhere, certainly downtown Page 36 city o f san lws OBlspo ■More trees on south Street and elsewhere – Santa Rosa, Broad Street, Orcutt to Broad – for shade, oxygen, coolnes s ■Need trees or shade structures in playgrounds, such as Meadow Park and elsewhere, Lagun a ■Transients on benches, downtown, outside businesses, by the cree k ■Better circulation around Los Ranchos ■Infill in Ri should maintain intent of General Plan and keep scale simila r ■It's too easy to find "work-arounds" General Plan . Too much wheelin' and dealin'. ■*Noise is a critical impact to residential neighborhood s ■Parking impacts on residential neighborhoods . ■Encourage more senior-assisted residential housing, board and care . ■More housing for 55+ citizens . ■Use in this process the definitions from the General Plan glossary . ■Make sure infrastructure is in place before development . Such as traffic flow, parking, parks, etc . Page 37